« Reply #136 on: July 31, 2021, 01:31:16 PM »
Why are we even having this conversation? Who started it? Whoever did should apologize to Simone Biles.
What? Moranis is the one who has more than proven his point. Before this argument, I was pretty sure Latynina was the best gymnast ever. But now, I am more than certain this is the case.
Latynina > Biles...not even close. Thanks Moranis!
Stop comparing checkers to chess or ballet to gymnastics or hearsay to video evidence.
TP and agree.
We can't look at the stats because there exists an uneven playing field. In 1950, there were 2.5 billion people on earth. That number has more than tripled. So how should we account for this if we actually want to compare?
What about advances in technology? Why should the current day athlete be discounted for his/her time in the gym and eating avocado ice cream when guys like Ruth waddled/rolled around the bases?
If we look at the two videos of SB and LL, is it clear that one is better than the other?
So we should just disregard what the old guys did. Is Jim Thorpe not a great athlete because he doesn't measure up to the modern athlete?
Do the Celtics championships in the 60's not count because there were only 8 or 9 teams and the C's only had to win 8 playoff games to win the title most of those years? I guess we should just put an * by them since they clearly don't count.
You can't do what you are doing or there is no point in even keeping score or records. I mean Lebron is clearly a more gifted athlete than Jordan, Russell, Kareem, Wilt, etc. so why isn't he the unquestioned greatest of all time? If being a better athlete is how we determine those things, then there is no debate.
Tom Brady is clearly not the best athlete at his position so he can't be the greatest QB ever. Has to be Mahomes, Rodgers, or Lamar Jackson. I mean since being a better athlete makes you greater.
I mean that is silly when you start translating it to other things.
You can certainly compare them, as you can compare anything else. I'm stating that the comparison becomes less accurate as the time gap expands.
In order to compare stats from different generations, there's a lot of subjective analysis. We can argue all day long, but no one is going to have the "right" answer just because they googled statistics. One's opinion is that LL is better than SB because of stats (same with Babe Ruth). Stats help paint a picture, but they're just one component.
Latynina didn't lose an All Around competition starting in 56 and ending at the 64 Olympics. That includes 2 Olympics, 2 World Championships, and 2 European Championships (which at the time were basically the same thing as the other two). In 64 and 65 she took silver to the second most decorated female Olympic gymnast of all time. That is the most dominant run in the sport's history.
I know very very little about gymnastics but in reading through this thread it seems contradictory that you dock Biles' medal count because she has had "more chances at medals" with the increased frequency of World Championships but credit Latynina for her total medal count even though she had a much longer career than Biles has had so far, and thus, more chances at medals.
Again, I don't know anything about gymnastics, but that's just faulty logic.
Logged
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008